The Shocking Truth Behind Joan of Arc's Remains - Forensic Science Uncovers a 2,000-Year Hoax

Scientific Concepts, Discoveries, and Natural Phenomena

Forensic identification of human remains

• Concept: Determine whether fragments belong to a specific historical person using multidisciplinary forensic methods.
• Case: Relics claimed to be Joan of Arc were tested using bone-level diagnostics, chemistry, imaging, and dating.

Limits of DNA from old remains (cremation/heat degradation)

• Attempted method: DNA analysis of bone to determine sex and compare to living descendants.
• Result: No preserved DNA could be extracted, likely due to high heat (the emphasis is that cremation makes preserved DNA unlikely).

Olfaction as forensic evidence (odor compound detection)

• Method: A perfumer’s trained nose assessed whether the bones had been burned by detecting volatile organic odor signatures.
• Observations:
  • No strong “burnt” odor detected.
  • A faint, long-lasting odor note consistent with decomposition was detected.
  • Vanillin / vanillic notes linked to putrefaction and decomposition processes (not definitive evidence of burning).

CT scanning and thermal exposure inference

• Method: Clinical CT (X-ray-based imaging producing 3D reconstructions) examined bone interiors.
• Logic: Compare relic bones to control samples from modern cremations to identify:
  • structural cracks/trauma consistent with exposure to >70°C
  • collagen degradation signatures associated with heat
• Result: The radiology team found no cremation signs on the scanned relic bones.

Organic/inorganic microanalysis of “blackened” material

• Microscopy goal: Determine whether dark material contains charcoal particles (direct evidence of burning).
• Findings:
  • No charcoal particles detected.
  • Identified resin plus material consistent with putrefied organic matter and pollen/fungal spores.
• Inference: The dark coating aligned with pine resin used historically for preservation.

Mass spectrometry for chemical characterization

• Method: Resin samples were dissolved and analyzed using mass spectrometry to identify chemical/elemental profiles.
• Controls:
  • modern cremation bones
  • a piece of dried skin later identified as from an Egyptian mummy
• Key results:
  • Relics and mummy skin showed enrichment in iron (Fe) and phosphorus (P) consistent with biological decay/soil chemistry, not cremation.
  • Modern cremation controls differed chemically and did not match the relic resin profile.

Radiocarbon (Carbon-14) dating

• Method: Accelerator-based radiocarbon dating using the decay of ^14C.
• Procedure (as described):
  1. convert the sample to CO₂
  2. purify and reduce to graphite
  3. press graphite into targets for accelerator analysis
• Results: Relic-bearing materials dated to late antiquity (about 2,355 years BP), placing them centuries older than Joan of Arc.

Textile origin and manufacturing indicators

• Method: Textile analysis using thread/fiber identification and microscopy.
• Findings:
  • fabric identified as flax linen (fine quality; thread count ~24 threads/cm²)
  • unusual thread twist direction: S-twist rather than the expected Z-twist typical of European threads from that era
  • inference: the twist pattern matched Middle Eastern textiles more closely than European manufacture

Archaeozoology for species and provenance

• Method: Measure the cat femur and compare to known breeds/species; estimate age/context.
• Result: Not consistent with a European domestic cat; suggested an origin such as Egypt.

Forensic history/anthropology of relic veneration and forgery motivation

• Context phenomenon: 19th-century French political conflict around church vs state increased demand for religious symbols.
• Hypothesis: A pharmacist in 1867 likely created/packaged “relics” by combining Egyptian mummy materials (including cat remains and resin-preserved elements) with a Joan-of-Arc label.

Packaging/textual material dating (inscription and container manufacture)

• Evidence type:
  • inscription style (handwriting period)
  • jar manufacture timing (18th-century attribution for hand-blown glass; inscription added recently in a historically styled manner)
• Conclusion: supports a later forgery, not medieval origin.

---

Methodology Outline (as shown in the investigation)

Initial forensic framing

• Treat relic fragments like a crime-scene evidence workflow (“CSI”-style).
• Recruit specialists across forensic pathology, radiology, chemistry, archaeology, and textile analysis.

DNA attempt

• Extract bone samples → send to forensic genetics labs.
• If sex and lineage DNA cannot be obtained → pivot to other techniques.

Odor screening

• Use a professional perfumer to detect signatures potentially linked to burning vs decomposition.

Imaging

• CT scan relic fragments in 3D.
• Compare structural signatures against modern cremation control bones.

Microscopy of dark coating

• Scrap coating → look for charcoal vs resin and biological inclusions (pollen/spores).

Chemical profiling

• Dissolve samples in heated acid → analyze by mass spectrometry.
• Compare elemental/chemical patterns between relic resin, mummy skin, and modern cremation controls.

Radiocarbon dating

• Date remaining organic carbon in fragments to establish time period.
• Check whether the dates align with Joan of Arc (15th century).

Provenance analysis of associated materials

• Textile: fiber type, thread count, and twist direction for regional origin.
• Faunal remains: identify cat femur likely from an Egyptian large breed.

Packaging and inscription evaluation

• Expert assessment of handwriting/inscription materials and jar dating to identify anachronisms.

---

Researchers / Sources Featured

• Dr. Philippe Charlier — forensic pathologist; investigator/primary expert
• Dr. Jean-Michel Duriez — perfumery specialist / odor analysis
• Dr. Jean Poupon — toxicologist; mass spectrometry / chemical analysis
• Christophe Moulherat — textile historian; fabric origin and manufacturing analysis
• Macarena Patou-Mathis — archaeozoologist; cat femur analysis
• Robert Montagu — antique expert; jar/inscription/material evaluation
• The Ion Beam Physics Laboratory (Zurich, Switzerland) — radiocarbon dating experts using ^14C